Discernment, definition of -- Mamusz' Restoration Forum

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 00:46:13 12/03/11 Sat
Author: George
Subject: Discernment, definition of

The modern revision of the KJV became necessary when some of the words used in that translation changed in usage so that the translation, although accurate when first made, became inaccurate because the meaning of the English word changed and no longer adequately represented the meaning of the original Greek or Hebrew word it was used to represent.

"Let" is such a word. In the early 1600's, "let" meant prevent -- the exact opposite of what it means now.

"prevent" is also such a word. It originally meant "to go before." Now it means to hinder effectively.

The definition of discernment has changed also.
The CofC is looking for priests who have discernment. However, it is not looking for priests with KJV discernment. The modern definition of discernment is: the quality of not being able to decide whether one is a a boy or a girl, even when the diaper is off.

Imagine the benefits of having one's teenager advised on the problems of puberty by a priest who, though an adult, is completely unsure of which sex he himself or she herself is, or having one's offspring counseled on dating and family life by a priest who claims to have known he was "gay" since age 4.

If a person testifies that he had a burning in his bosom that convinced him at age 4 that the Book of Mormon is historically true and correct, he is treated with respect, but the entire church would not be turned upside down to make insure complete consistency of all the theology and practice of the church with this belief. And the First Presidency would not be falling all over itself to ensure his ordination. In fact, it would consider such a belief a crippling hindrance to ordination. After all, since, to the leadership at least, believing that the Book of Mormon is true is similar to voicing a belief that the earth was created in six days, or to indicating a belief that the fact Adam and Eve were of opposite sexes is of any significance.

On the other hand, if a member testifies that he had a burning somewhere else that convinced him he was a homosexual at age 4, the leadership considers it a crisis if the entire church is not totally overhauled to make the entire theology of the church absolutely consistent with this person's beliefs, and to see to it that the doctrines and rules of the church are worked over with the blacksmith's hammer to accomodate his ordination.

Odd inconsistency, I think.

Perhaps the difference in the church's reaction is due to the difference in the location of the burning, or due to the fact that moving the location of the burning results in a different and more desirable doctrine. It's all rather complicated and not likely to be understood by those following the obsolete Jacobean definition of discernment.

George

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]